Advertisement

Abstract

The goal of the TOVE project is fourfold: 1) to create a shared representation (aka ontology) of the enterprise that each agent in the distributed enterprise can jointly understand and use, 2) define the meaning of each description (aka semantics), 3) implement the semantics in a set of axioms that will enable TOVE to automatically deduce the answer to many “common sense” questions about the enterprise, and 4) define a symbology for depicting a concept in a graphical context. The model is multi-level spanning conceptual, generic and application layers. The generic and application layers all also stratified and composed of micro theories spanning, for example, activities, time, resources, constraints, etc. at the generic level. Critical to the TOVE effort is enabling the easy instantiation of the model for a particular enterprise TOVE models will be automatically created as a by product of the enterprise design function. TOVE is currently being built to model a computer manufacturer and an aerospace engineering firm.

Keywords

Enterprise Model Shared Representation Enterprise Integration Graphical Context Ontological Primitive 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    Allen, J.F. Towards a General Theory of Action and Time. Artificial Intelligence 23(2): 123–154, 1984.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. [2]
    Bobrow, D.G. Qualitative Reasoning About Physical Systems. MIT Press, 1985.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    Bobrow, D., and Winograd, T. KRL: Knowledge Representation Language. Cognitive Science 1(1), 1977.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    Brachman, R.J. A Structural Paradigm for Representing Knowledge. PhD thesis, Harvard University, 1977.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    Brachman, R.J. On the Epistemological Status of Semantic Networks. Associative Networks: Representation and Use of Knowledge by Computers. In Findler, N.V., Academic Press, 1979, pages 3–50.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    Brachman, R.J., and Schmolze, J.G. An Overview of the KL-ONE Knowledge Representation Systems. Cognitive Science 9(2), 1985.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    Davis, E. Constraint Propagation with Interval Labels. Artificial Intelligence 32:281–331, 1987.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. [8]
    Davis, B.R., Smith, S., Davies, M., and St. John, W. Integrated Computer-aided Manufacturing (ICAM) Architecture Part Ill/Volume III: Composite Function Model of “Design Product” (DESO). Technical Report AFWAL-TR-82-4063 Volume III, Materials Laboratory, Air Force Wright Aeronautical Laboratories, Air Force Systems Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio 45433, 1983.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    ESPRIT-AMICE. CIM-OSA — A Vendor Independent CIM Architecture. In Proceedings of CINCOM 90, pages 177–196. National Institute for Standards and Technology, 1990.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    Fahlman, S.E. A System for Representing and Using Real-World Knowledge. PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1977.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    Fox, M.S. On Inheritance in Knowledge Representation. In Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence. 95 First St., Los Altos, CA 94022, 1979.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    Fox, M.S. An Organizational View of Distributed Systems. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics SMC-11(1):70–80, 1981.Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    Fox, M.S. Constraint-Directed Search: A Case Study of Job-Shop Scheduling. PhD thesis, Carnegie Mellon University, 1983. CMU-RI-TR-85-7, Intelligent Systems Laboratory, The Robotics Institute, Pittsburgh,PA.Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    Fox, M.S., Reddy, Y.V., Husain, N., McRoberts, M. Knowledge Based Simulation: An Artificial Intelligence Approach to System Modeling and Automating the Simulation Life Cycle. Artificial Intelligence, Simulation and Modeling. In Widman, L.E., John Wiley & Sons, 1989.Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    Lenat, D., and Guha, R.V. Building Large Knowledge Based Systems: Representation and Inference in the CYC Project. Addison Wesley Pub. Co., 1990.Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    Martin, C., and Smith, S. Integrated Computer-aided Manufacturing (ICAM) Architecture Part III/Volume IV: Composite Information Model of “Design Product” (DES1). Technical Report AFWAL-TR-82-4063 Volume IV, Materials Laboratory, Air Force Wright Aeronautical Laboratories, Air Force Systems Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio 45433, 1983.Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    Martin, C., Nowlin, A., St. John, W., Smith, S., Ruegsegger, T., and Small, A. Integrated Computer-aided Manufacturing (ICAM) Architecture Part IHIVolume VI: Composite Information Model of “Manufacture Product” (MFG1). Technical Report AFWAL-TR-82-4063 Voluem VI, Materials Laboratory, Air Force Wright Aeronautical Laboratories, Air Force Systems Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio 45433, 1983.Google Scholar
  18. [18]
    Rieger, C, and Grinberg, M. The Causal Representation and Simulation of Physical Mechanisms. Technical Report TR-495, Dept. of Computer Science, University of Maryland, 1977.Google Scholar
  19. [19]
    Roberts, R.B., and Goldstein, I.P. The FRL Manual. Technical Report MIT AI Lab Memo 409, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1977.Google Scholar
  20. [20]
    Sathi, A., Fox, M.S., and Greenberg, M. Representation of Activity Knowledge for Project Management. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence PAMI-7(5):531–552, September, 1985.Google Scholar
  21. [21]
    Scheer, A-W. Enterprise-Wide Data Modelling: Information Systems in Industry. Springer-Verlag, 1989.Google Scholar
  22. [22]
    Smith, S., Ruegsegger, T., and St. John, W. Integrated Computer-aided Manufacturing (ICAM) Architecture Part III/Volume V: Composite Function Model of “Manufacture Product” (MFGO). Technical Report AFWAL-TR-82-4063 Volume V, Materials Laboratory, Air Force Wright Aeronautical Laboratories, Air Force Systems Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio 45433, 1983.Google Scholar
  23. [23]
    Yeomans, R.W., Choudry, A., and ten Hagen, P.J.W. Design Rules for a CIM System. Elsevier Science Publishing Company, 1985.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mark S. Fox
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Industrial EngineeringUniversity of TorontoTorontoCanada

Personalised recommendations